Does the #4 seed winning the NC strengthen the argument to expand?

[MadDawg]

I think it does.

[smootness]

No.

Obviously at some point a 3 or 4 seed was going to win it, but it does not in any way mean they should be there in the first place. I'm not evaluating on whether OSU should have been in or whether they should have expanded to begin with; just saying that #4 winning doesn't strengthen the argument to expand, logically speaking.

That won't stop everyone from calling for it, though. But we all knew it would happen. Once they expanded to 4, the expansion to 8 was inevitable. What I didn't expect was to see coaches like Urban Meyer demand that rosters expand if more games are added. It shouldn't happen, either, but it might.

[Johnson85]

I think it does.

Just depends on how much you want the regular season to count. If you want the champion to be determined based on overall body of work, the current system is good. You have to have a good season to get into the playoffs, and having 4 teams recognizes that it's not always apparent who the most deserving two teams are. The more you expand the playoffs, the less you are awarding the championship based on the overall body of work and the more you are awarding based on who peaked at the right time.

There are good reasons for each way. I do think this year was an anomaly. It's possible that TCU or Baylor deserved to be in the playoff and would have won it. I don't think most years there will be more than 4 teams with a legitimate argument that they might be the best team in the country.

[HancockCountyDog]

The only thing that matter is the TV ratings.

They were through the roof for the semifinals and finals. So yeah, its going to 8 games.

[Liverpooldawg]

Yes. It needs to be 8 at least. Take the 5 Power Conference champions, the highest ranked non-power 5 team, and 2 at large teams. Hold the championship game on the Saturday of the off week between the NFL conference championships and the Super Bowl. Use the bowls. 4 for the quarterfinals on New Years Day. 2 for the semi-finals a week or two weeks later. Then one for the title game. Let them bid year by year instead of alternating. Or big for 4 year blocks.

[Mjoelner34]

Yes. It needs to be 8 at least. Take the 5 Power Conference champions, the highest ranked non-power 5 team, and 2 at large teams. Hold the championship game on the Saturday of the off week between the NFL conference championships and the Super Bowl. Use the bowls. 4 for the quarterfinals on New Years Day. 2 for the semi-finals a week or two weeks later. Then one for the title game. Let them bid year by year instead of alternating. Or big for 4 year blocks.

I would do this with the exception of taking the non-power 5 team. I would instead have 3 at-large power 5 teams. Yes, yes I know Boise won their bowl this year but I just can't justify taking a team like them or Marshall. If a team loses to Ole Miss but beats the equivalent of Vandy in their only other game versus the power 5, is that a resume that qualifies you to play for the national title? I don't think so. Not by a long shot! If this year would have been an 8 team playoff, Boise would have knocked out 10-2 Michigan State whose only 2 losses were to the two teams playing last night. Meanwhile, Boise lost to Air Force.

[Liverpooldawg]

If the non-power 5 team could win three games against that kind of opposition then they would deserve it.

[Mjoelner34]

If the non-power 5 team could win three games against that kind of opposition then they would deserve it.

But not at the expense of knocking out a team with an impressive record that played a much tougher schedule throughout the year. At least in my opinion.

[dawgs]

Yes. It needs to be 8 at least. Take the 5 Power Conference champions, the highest ranked non-power 5 team, and 2 at large teams. Hold the championship game on the Saturday of the off week between the NFL conference championships and the Super Bowl. Use the bowls. 4 for the quarterfinals on New Years Day. 2 for the semi-finals a week or two weeks later. Then one for the title game. Let them bid year by year instead of alternating. Or big for 4 year blocks.

8 would need the quarters to be played on campus. It'd make for epic atmospheres. You'd see half empty stadiums otherwise cause fans wouldn't wanna blow their budget on a quarterfinal trip with a possible semi-final and championship game looming. And it rewards the highest seeded teams with a home game - big for those concerned it'd significantly hurt the regular season.

[Quaoarsking]

8 would need the quarters to be played on campus. It'd make for epic atmospheres. You'd see half empty stadiums otherwise cause fans wouldn't wanna blow their budget on a quarterfinal trip with a possible semi-final and championship game looming. And it rewards the highest seeded teams with a home game - big for those concerned it'd significantly hurt the regular season.

Agreed on the home sites. I'd use them for semifinals too, to give a great incentive for teams to go all out to get a top 2 seed. On-campus atmospheres are always better, and every single playoff game, even if it was Wake Forest vs. Washington State or something, would be a hard sell-out at a home site.

[Quaoarsking]

I would do this with the exception of taking the non-power 5 team. I would instead have 3 at-large power 5 teams. Yes, yes I know Boise won their bowl this year but I just can't justify taking a team like them or Marshall. If a team loses to Ole Miss but beats the equivalent of Vandy in their only other game versus the power 5, is that a resume that qualifies you to play for the national title? I don't think so. Not by a long shot! If this year would have been an 8 team playoff, Boise would have knocked out 10-2 Michigan State whose only 2 losses were to the two teams playing last night. Meanwhile, Boise lost to Air Force.

I agree that Michigan State is more deserving of a bid than Boise on the strength of their resume, but all 128 FBS teams need to have a theoretical chance of being able to play for a national championship. Without the autobid, teams from outside the power would rarely even make the top 8, because their SOS and resume is just never going to be good. The only teams that ever would have gotten there this century are a couple Utah, TCU, and Boise teams, and 2 of those are in the major conferences now.

This year was pretty unusual in that the 5 major champions were ranked 1-5 in the final playoff rankings. Most years at least 1, if not more of those teams is outside the top 8 (sometimes way out), so a lot of years the non-power autobid won't be the lowest seeded team in the field.

[Liverpooldawg]

8 would need the quarters to be played on campus. It'd make for epic atmospheres. You'd see half empty stadiums otherwise cause fans wouldn't wanna blow their budget on a quarterfinal trip with a possible semi-final and championship game looming. And it rewards the highest seeded teams with a home game - big for those concerned it'd significantly hurt the regular season.

I agree about the atmosphere but there is a lot of money and intrenched interests behind the bowls. The only way the 4 team thing happened was including the bowls in it.

[dickiedawg]

I don't think I care to see it go to 8.
I could see going NFL style with 5 conference champions plus a group of 5 "wild card" with the 2 "play-in" games played on campus. Take the committee politics out of it, let an RPI or FPI or something seed the teams.
That would make sense to me, BUT I find it much more likely they go to 8 teams, 5 conf champs, group of 5 and 2 wild cards. To me, that's too much. I don't think there will be a ton of interest in the quarterfinals.

[sleepy dawg]

It shouldn't be based on that. Anybody can beat anybody any week. Ohio State even got beat by Virginia Tech this year, so you could make the same argument to move it to 32-64. For that matter, maybe we should include everyone:

Southern Miss beat Appalachian St 21 - 20
Appalachian St beat ULM 31 - 29
ULM beat Wake Forest 17 - 10
Wake Forest beat Virginia Tech 6 - 3
Virginia Tech beat Ohio St 35 - 21

Therefore, Southern Miss is better than Ohio St.

[Mjoelner34]

It shouldn't be based on that. Anybody can beat anybody any week. Ohio State even got beat by Virginia Tech this year, so you could make the same argument to move it to 32-64. For that matter, maybe we should include everyone:

Southern Miss beat Appalachian St 21 - 20
Appalachian St beat ULM 31 - 29
ULM beat Wake Forest 17 - 10
Wake Forest beat Virginia Tech 6 - 3
Virginia Tech beat Ohio St 35 - 21

Therefore, Southern Miss is better than Ohio St.

LOL Spectacular! For you young folks on here if you ever hear anyone mention "USM math" THIS is what we're talking about. This style of math was invented by USM fans to 'prove' they were better than us every year that we didn't play them.

Just pointing out that even though you may not have intended this way, you perfectly illustrated their way of thinking when comparing themselves to us. Just substitute Ohio St. with MSU and voila!

[dawgs]

I agree about the atmosphere but there is a lot of money and intrenched interests behind the bowls. The only way the 4 team thing happened was including the bowls in it.

The old bowl connections are about to become moot. The bowl officials make money and they lined the pockets of various ncaa officials as long as they could to keep themselves relevant but their days of being heavily influential are numbered. It's like anhueser-Busch and coors spending millions to line the pockets of ms politicians to make asinine arguments against raising the alcohol content to keep out most microbreweries. The ncaa can keep foolishly sticking with the bowls, but I think they are realizing they are out of excuses for catering to the bowls and the fans see right thru their bullshit.